You won't be shocked to hear that as a divorce attorney one of the questions that I'm often asked is, 'when is my finest time to apply for divorce in order to get the greatest settlement?'.

The reward they want is their husband (or better half's) pension and I provide an extremely basic response: the longer the marital relationship - the larger the claim.

Take Trudy whose second marital relationship was to Eric, a rich residential or commercial property developer who had a few residential or commercial properties, ISAs and financial investments. To Trudy, the real reward was Eric's pension which was worth more than ₤ 1 million.

The marital relationship pertained to an end after five years, but when Trudy tried to claim versus Eric's pension she was devastated to be informed by her lawyer that rather of the half-share that she had actually calculated in her mind that she would be granted, she was wrong.

Eric could, in reality, ring fence all the pension that he had developed prior to the marriage. This suggested that Trudy could only claim a small proportion that had actually accumulated throughout their brief time together.

The judge felt that the excessiveness of Trudy's claim was too expensive which the bulk of the wealth in the marriage had actually originated from Eric and this was shown in the settlement that Trudy got.

So while she got a capitalised settlement to reflect the lifestyle that they had delighted in together, it was nowhere near her expectations. The ethical of this story? A short marital relationship equates to less assets awarded.

It could not have actually been more various for Gloria, who was wed to Frank for more than thirty years. Frank confessed to having affairs with females who he referred to as 'the hired assistance', thinking it did not really count as cheating. It did to Gloria. As the pensions stacked up during their three years relationship, Gloria had the ability to declare half of it and was approved equality of all the pensions.

Vanessa Lloyd Platt, a top divorce lawyer, states the longer the marriage, the larger the divorce claim

Frank might not ring fence one cent of it. And thanks to the length of the marital relationship, Gloria received what is called a 'Joint Lives Order' for maintenance. Simply put, this implies Gloria would be offered maintenance for life, although this is unusual today as most upkeep payments are for a set term just.

It was not helped by the fact that Frank had not been forthcoming over the real extent of his savings and had at the last moment attempted to transfer funds offshore. He was offered a punitive award and Gloria gained from several thousands more on her side of the divorce equation. The moral here is that dishonesty does not pay - especially in a divorce court.

So that's brief and long marital relationships - what about a longer than typical length of marriage (12 years) for say 15 years?

Here the court will equalise the capital of the pension unless wealth has actually been accrued before or certainly, for a period, after separation.

It is always essential that a pensions specialist analyse the worth of a pension so the right figure can be calculated.

Which is where Gemma came unstuck. She had a 16-year marital relationship to City broker Paul. His pension ran into numerous thousands of pounds. Gemma was none too troubled by the pension however, like lots of other halves I see, she desired the security of staying in the home that she enjoyed. So rather of declaring any of Paul's pension she traded it off against the worth of your house.

This is called a 'set-off', however as a legal representative I would always recommend to any customer that an actuary report is acquired very first and all alternatives are considered.

Wives in specific can bring out a lesser offer when they pick this choice. The ethical here is that you might feel young and prepared to start afresh, however do not be too fast to trade away your future pension.

Vanessa says that in a marriage longer than the average of 12 years, the court will equalise the capital of the pension unless wealth has been accumulated before or, for a duration, after separation

Another concern I'm frequently asked is whether a mediator will take into account all of the couple's possessions to maximise a settlement.

Numerous people seem to believe that arbitrators will go easy on the parties - and spouses in particular - may get away with more by utilizing an arbitrator, than if the matter is before the court.

This is a fallacy, as Neil discovered. The company director believed that mediation would mean that he could put pressure on Judy to settle. It had actually been a long marital relationship covering twenty-eight years and he thought that Judy was not the brightest. He felt he might bluff his method through and hoodwink the arbitrator.

What Neil had not reckoned upon was the tenacity and cleverness of the conciliator who firmly insisted that all info be produced for the meetings. The arbitrator might see that Neil was being obstructive in answering inquiries about financial transactions and movement of money between subsidiary companies.

Little had Neil suspected that the conciliator had actually been a forensic detective for HMRC, before becoming a matrimonial mediator. After numerous sessions the conciliator recommended a settlement figure which Neil was outraged by and insisted they go to court. Unfortunately for Neil - the specific same settlement figure was reached in court. It's worth keeping in mind that mediation can be a far better method of fixing matters however is never a soft alternative.

Mediators will help the couple and instruct actuaries to exercise pension departments whatever the length of the marital relationship. The courts are now encouraging the parties to consider alternatives to court proceedings more than ever. Arbitration is likewise being encouraged. All these alternatives are available in brief, medium and long marital relationships.

This is the reason EVERYONE is separating ... and why your marital relationship is at danger without you recognizing

So no matter the length of your marriage, I recommend all my clients not to have impractical expectations of what the final figure ought to be. It's essential to realise that you can not penalize your quickly to be ex-partner in the courtroom. Unless you can show that the behaviour of your spouse has had a monetary impact, the conduct or behaviour will be disregarded.

Let me introduce you now to Henry, who believed that he was being especially creative when he transferred his shares in the family company to his sibling, cashed in the capital from his pension and provided it to a buddy and bought himself a Lamborghini.

This was due to the fact that Claudia, his partner of twelve years had actually started divorce proceedings. At the end of the litigation, the court discovered that he was intentionally attempting to minimize the possessions offered to Claudia and included back all the worth of the pension, the cost of the Lamborghini and the shares to his side of the formula and then divided all of it in half. Henry's actions were so contrived that his attempts to drain pipes the possessions absolutely backfired on him. Oh and Henry had to sell the Lamborghini.

The moral of the story when it comes to how to increase your settlement? Don't attempt to be too clever, play reasonable and truthfully, or run the risk of the very opposite of what you wished to accomplish. Divorce can be a minefield, and it does not have to explode for either of you if you both take reasonable actions towards resolving matters.

* All names have been changed to secure client identity.